ReviewJournal of bioethical inquiry2025
Institutionalization of Bioethics in Higher Education Institutions: A Systematic Mapping.
Review in Journal of bioethical inquiry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Bioethics has become a crucial discipline in higher education. This study aims to understand the institutionalization of bioethics within this field and examine documented initiatives related to its integration. To achieve this, a systematic mapping was conducted using Petersen and Kitchenham's methodology, analysing 444 relevant articles. The results indicate a higher concentration of studies addressing the institutionalization of bioethics at the undergraduate level (40.5 per cent), with fewer publications focused on the postgraduate level (19.4 per cent). Most of the studies are concentrated in the health sciences (81.3 per cent), while the remainder are distributed among the social sciences, humanities, biological sciences, and engineering. The analysis revealed a significant lack of studies on comparative practices and the use of replicated experiences (2 per cent), as well as limited evidence on the institutionalization of bioethics research in higher education (10.3 per cent). These gaps underscore the need for further research in these areas. Additionally, the integration of active methodologies and educational technologies has enhanced bioethics programmes (21.4 per cent), fostering more interactive and engaged learning environments. This study highlights a critical gap in the implementation of bioethics based on empirically validated experiences. It proposes the development of an implementation model that adapts these experiences to different educational contexts. Cooperation between institutions and the creation of research networks are recommended as key strategies for sharing best practices, thereby facilitating the more effective and widespread integration of bioethics across various educational settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40676337What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.